Then I'm not sure what your point is. "freedom" in this context usually relates to the law. As such "freedom to X" usually implies the legal framework to support X.
If you are saying "freedom to X doesn't mean no legal consequences" then the phrase would be meaningless.
> "freedom" in this context usually relates to the law.
Then where is the "a right to freedom of speech" enshrined in the law? The USA doesn't have that - only limited protection from the government. The UK certainly doesn't.
Yes. Can you do it without consequences to yourself? No, because that is almost certainly a protected case in law.